Ogami Musashi

Hello, I tried LALT+ENTER, it works but then i can't click on any button anymore with my mouse and thus i'm stuck at the login screen. The mouse pointer moves but it seems as if the active area of the mouse is not DCS.

Nope :) see my post above.

The term supercruise was invented in the 70's in the infancy of the ATF program, when it was a ground attack plane. You have multiple research papers from manufacturers, nasa, and other gov office of supercruisers. Here is one example: http://www.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADB022011 It was then thought the plane would travel long distances (more than 250 miles) at supersonic speeds not using afterburner. Due to several changes in the propulsion dynamics, the fuel consumption in supersonic is far greater than in subsonic even in a supercruising engine (yes, supercrusing is not only an aerodynamics requirements but you need to build a special engine for it, that some mass flow characteristics) and thus you always lose some range when supercruising. When the ATF program was switched to an air superiority fighter, requirements for the supercruising leg diminished towards a 100 nm dash+ a subsonic leg. Far later in the F-22 program fuel capacity was decreased from 12 to 8,2 tons so the subsonic leg was cut. The F-22 currently loses 100nm of combat radius for 100nm of supercruising at mach 1.5 and 40k feet.

You perfectly sum it up..and that's why when you're a dev you're stuck between not saying anything until you are decimals away from being 100% sure of release date or trying to give hints at the risk of being slayed by the community when things do not turn out like planned. I'm fine with hints, different hints have different values.. the steam release date is an engagement that seems to mean things are going well unless an unforseen problem appears...Which is always possible.

You can never be sure to deliver on the date said in soft dev. Even the day before the release you can find a bug, an extorior agent may force you to delay etc... Look, we are at max 1 month away from release and LN can't give a release date because of many possible unexpected sources of delay. What do you think would be the level of confidence for announcing a date months ago? It's always the same, people wan't them to say nothing until it is sure, but it's never sure,so they may miss the date they get beaten by everybody but when they say nothing people cry because "they do not communicate" .... I actually think most of the things you oppose to them has been triggered by community behavior.

Of course there're differences between modules. For once not all planes have the same number of polygons in their cockpit. They do not have the same number of parts in their damage models, not the same weight of textures etc.... Read the performance posts, you'll see some modules are more taxing than others. And besides even if i don't see anything troubling in mig-21 videos so far, i don't think your overconfident tone is of any use for the discussion. His question is as worth discussing as the countless "when it is released?" and "F5 F5 F5 F5 F5" posts.

I can relate to those problems. First try after updating to 1.2.10, all my cougar buttons were not working (but axis yes). I went into the controler options and saw that all the mappings were gone. I tried to load my diff.lua but nothing happened. So i remapped all buttons but in game cougar buttons were not working. I'm using TARGET profiles (via script editor), and what i saw in the option is that in 1.2.10 the controlers list has both the thrustmaster combined joystick (a virtual stick that is created when you run a TARGET profile) and my cougar which is not normal, the options should only see the combined stick. About loss of keyboard commands, i experience that since 1.2.8. Sometimes, after a mission loading i only have some keys that are working. Sometimes even the esc command doesn't work at all... And i also experienced the track IR shaking after updating to 1.2.10. Had to do many restarts to have it correct. Definitely a show stopper for now :)

LN. They don't do whatever they want ED is doing their own business and they have to keep with DCSW roadmap changes. Sorry if i misinterpreted your post. :) However it is still they way i feel about the saga. When cobra recently stated no ETA following the fact that mig-21 was pushed back to 2.0 people started to complain about having no ETA. And when cobra stated target release for 1.2.9 and that 1.2.10 came in..kids started to complain "hey another target missed!" . That's is really annoying. We don't know enough to draw conclusion both on EDGE or mig-21 release. Let's stay calm :)

Your sentence sums it all: You are angry they miss their announcement yet complain about lack of communication which i interpret = i want to complain whatever the reason. Come'on, they're trying to communicate with all of you but they can't control everything and then spoiled kids yell "you lied to us!" so they try to be cautious only to have a bunch of kids bi..ing "We want to have some ETA!". Seriously, that's annoying to read all of this.

In Rise of Flight main menu (a museum) you have an I-16 in the background. Not the epoch, never done and surely never will. Not saying about LN. Just that yes it is possible to place planes randomly.

Hi, I have the same problem, it is too far back. I have an additional question. In the complete start up video the cockpit camera zooms in and moves behind the stick. How can i do that? (i have a track IR but it is fine if i can do that with the keyboard). Tried moving the camera down but she doesn't move enough. Thanks!

it reads "The guys at Leatherneck have been doing a great job and this week we integrated the AI MiG-21bis into DCS World 2, version 2.0.0 (there will be no 1.3.0 due to the extensive DCS World changes that are coming). Later in 2014, after version 1.2.9, both will be released. The model looks stunning as we think you will agree!" And later in the comments: "DCS World 2 will be freeware" Here you have

It has been officially stated on the facebook page that : -DCS 2.0 will be free -Mig-21 will be released at the same time

GTX770 SLI

Hi, Yes doing them manualy works...But that's a lot of entries to correct! Do you have any idea why i does that?

Hello, I tried your 124 vesrion but i'm having a problem. I followed the instructions and the final step was to run the DCSworld.tmc script while loading kb and joystick profiles after having defined the modifications. However despite having the DCSwold.tmc running i get red color on commands with modifiers 30/31. Any idea? PS.: on a side note while DCSworld.tmc compiles just fine, the other ones return "Runtime Error: Symbol not found: main".

Thank you very much. I'll try to do that and if not working then i'll wait for the release of you profile for 1.28:) (can't play that much for now anyway )

Hello Home Fries, First thank you for the great work with this profiles! I'm a returnee to simualtions and dusted off my cougar! And it seems i've forgotten about everything. I'm using it with DCS world 1.28 RC1 beta for the F-15C and i'm having trouble because some functions seem not to work or i don't get the timing. I can't get many things like airbrakes, trim or dofight swith BVR mode working. I the flaps working (once i got the tempo :) ) but then in flight they didn't work anymore. Is it me? or your profile maybe do not fully work with 1.28?

So now you're doing Hotline Olgerd? See ya

yes for sure, it is very probable the datalink is not reliable! Especially because of narrow bandwith. Interestingly, this datalink, while being old is still severly classified, especially as far as the SU-27 modes are concerned.

As metionned by Force Feedback the datalink on SU-27 and mig-29 gives a lot of informations. As i said the SU-27 has even more informations on display. About reliability, while a 100% reliable mechanism doesn't exist i didn't hear so far something about failures of the datalink, however what i know is that the datalink uses kind of narrow bandwith so that informations are not transmitted very fast BUT i do not know if it has been upgraded. As said, thoses datalinkes are really about giving more SHOOT opportunities to flankers and fulcrums while JTIDS and MIDS are about giving SA to pilots. So i think that would be really interesting to have it in the future.

You're right about the complexity of the datalink and also i'm quite a bit affraid that the more qualissified nature to the SU-27 datalink features poses problems but well ,we'll see! As a personal point of view, i have to admit i consider lock on strenghts to be the FC SU-25's and BS KA-50. This latter really represents a big step forward. so the ka-50 itself is suffisent for me. But seeing as the KA-50 takes time to modelize , well...that's why i'm pretty sure even after with the F-16 project we won't have still the Russian datalinks BUT hey i now things are always moving at ED so who knows! I'd be pleased to be wrong, as the flanker with EFM and Detailed avionics is definitevely on my top wishlist.

Not to the extent of the russian planes one, but anyway, good point, this would need to be implemented. You and me know that if it's one day implemented it will be in years and you know why because you're a beta tester. my bad, this adds even more disparity. Thank you.

Hello, Trop, I understand your point, as some said, i think you're a bit missleading on the subject of a sim. But at the same time, you're right, when a sim is developped attention is paid to level the forces. This is done not by tweaking planes but simply by the choice of the plane. The problem here trop, is that when it was decided that LO would go with several planes a lot of issues came out and i shall tell you some of them: -the documentation for russian planes was near non exitent especially the SU-27 and the one for US plane very few so by that time only press sources where aviable to the team. The documentation and sources became aviable during the developpement and after de release. >> This led to a lot of incomplete modelisations that were filled latter. -There was not enough people to encode hardcore avionics. The lock on project switched rapidly from a SU-39 add on to a mutli planes sim. Considering the timeline at this time, this is was unrealistic to hope for and harcorde simulation. >> the simulation , despite what was adversited by ubi was not in a shape to be realistic enought, that was not possible with that numer of planes. -The mutli plane project went because Ubisoft wanted to attract casual simmers and the planes choosed were, in russian clan, the one in flanker, on USA, one the most popular planes. Thus the choice of planes that affects the leveling of forces was made part on the heritage of flanker (after all, lock on was intented first as a flanker follow on) and on commercial needs. Thoses needs and the ressources aviable were not enough so that the result was a bit extrapolated I.E: the level of performance for the plane was a bit guessed by dev. Later as information arrived they tweaked the planes to better reflect the reality still there're a lot of shortcomings for the reasons i explained. What all that fuss mean? when the choice was made, according to the data aviable for ED, this was a level choice with both planes having their strenghts and weaknesses but overall easy to overcome, but that was not realistic. As many said, in real life, the avionic suite and weaponary of the flanker system is on decade behind the F-15C one. So, as ED made it closer to reality, the balance switched a bit. THAT SAID, nobody in this post mentionned the big and major difference between a SU-27/mig-29 and an F-15. The flanker and fulcrums in russian service were NEVER meant to go outside russia!! This reflect in a very simple fact that unfortunately ED never modelized and this is where it comes short: the datalink. Both plane and especially the flanker fly under what was(is??) a pretty big and complete datalink system, providing them a lot of information, possibility to be remotely controlled, having a lot of information on target type, share informations from CGI, awacs and other planes etc... In such context, with the datalink missiles could be lanched withtout radar activated and on the flanker there was special modes to enhance the performance(the datalink was the same for both flanker and fulcrums, but the flanker had more modes and precise datalink functions). Now this could have leveled the thing, but that datalink is pretty complicated to modelize And i'm not quite sure this is will done in the future unfortunately. Now however you have to face something, when sU-27 came out, compared to F-15A it was the same level, the problem is that, one plane had upgrades (the eagle) not the other... As many said, you can still win over F-15 by exploiting the specialities of the flanker, this is hard for sure, but flying a fighter is always flying in his strong points, if you fly where it is low...you've lost. I hope you understand the situation better with my post.

yeah the SU-27 deserves AFM and avionics ^_^ By the way may i ask about the water effect, i could see the vapor effet, but does the waves moves in accordance with the turbulence? great video!